Delhi High Court
Chand Miyan vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 10 November, 2010
Author: Hima Kohli
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 1390/2010
Decided on 10.11.2010
IN THE MATTER OF :
CHAND MIYAN ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Rakhi Dubey, Advocate
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Akshay Bipin, ASC for the State
CORAM
* HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may No
be allowed to see the Judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No
3. Whether the judgment should be No
reported in the Digest?
HIMA KOHLI, J. ( ORAL )
1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner under Article
226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Cr.PC praying
inter alia for quashing of the order dated 09.08.2010 passed by the Govt. of
NCT of Delhi, rejecting the application of the petitioner for grant of parole
and seeking parole for a period of three months to engage a counsel for
drafting and filing a SLP in the Supreme Court against the judgment dated
29.04.2010 passed by the High Court in Crl.Appeal No.1023/2008 arising
out of FIR No.52/2004 under Sections 302/324/34 IPC.
2. The application of the petitioner for grant of parole was rejected
on the ground of adverse police report and in view of the fact that the
petitioner was convicted in 03 cases, acquitted in 02 cases, undergone
sentence in 01 case and is pending trial in 01 case.
3. The nominal roll of the petitioner was called for. As per the said
nominal roll, against a quantum of sentence of life imprisonment and a fine
of Rs.10,000/- in default, simple imprisonment for 3 months, the petitioner
has undergone a sentence of six years, eight months and eleven days as on
08.11.2010, and earned remission for one year, two months and six days.
His jail conduct for the past one year is stated to be satisfactory.
4. A status report is filed by the Joint Secretary (Home), Govt. of
NCT of Delhi. As per the status report, the verification of the application was
carried out by the SHO of the area. The residential address of the petitioner
was found to be correct. It is confirmed that the brother of the petitioner
was residing at the given address as a tenant. According to the enquiry at
the given address, the petitioner has relations with his brothers and
relatives, and he has no enmity in the colony. It is however stated that the
petitioner is a bad character of Bundle-A, at P.S. Krishna Nagar and he is
involved in 06 more cases, apart from the case in hand.
5. As per the status report filed by the Superintendent, Tihar Jail,
New Delhi, the petitioner has been acquitted in 02 cases pertaining to FIR
Case Nos. 174/96 and 377/98 and he has been convicted in 03 cases. In FIR
case no. 29/2000, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous punishment for 02
months. In FIR case no. 309/2000, he was convicted and released on
probation for 06 months. In FIR case no. 235/2003, he was convicted for the
period already undergone by him.
6. In view of the fact that parole is sought by the petitioner for
filing of SLP against the judgment of the High Court in Crl.Appeal No.
1023/2008, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is granted parole
for a period of one month, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.20,000/- with one local surety of the like amount, who shall
be a member of his family, to the satisfaction of the trial court.
(ii) The petitioner shall report to the SHO of Police Station: Timar
Pur, once a week on every Sunday at 10:00 AM and shall not
leave the National Capital Territory of Delhi during the period of
parole.
(iii) The petitioner shall furnish a telephone number to the Jail
Superintendent on which he can be contacted, if required. After
his release, he shall also inform his telephone number to the
SHO of the police station concerned.
(iv) Immediately upon the expiry of period of parole, the petitioner
shall surrender himself before the Jail Superintendent.
(v) The petitioner shall furnish a copy of the SLP filed in the
Supreme Court to the Superintendent Jail at the time of
surrendering.
(vi) The period of parole shall be counted from the day after the date
when the petitioner is released from jail.
7. The petition is disposed of.
DASTI.
(HIMA KOHLI)
NOVEMBER 10, 2010 JUDGE
sk
